Music Banter

Music Banter (https://www.musicbanter.com/)
-   General Music (https://www.musicbanter.com/general-music/)
-   -   What Sucks about This Artist?: Rolling Stones Edition (https://www.musicbanter.com/general-music/91641-what-sucks-about-artist-rolling-stones-edition.html)

Chula Vista 04-21-2018 03:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Batlord (Post 1942992)
You probably just don't understand country.

They were the first British band that successfully fused American music with gritty Brit R&R. Country, Gospel, R&B, Pop, and Chicago Blues all done with a British swagger.

Rolling Stones = Greasy Rock.

Country was such a small piece of the puzzle. You focusing on it re-enforces the fact that you simply don't understand it. **** off.

OccultHawk 04-21-2018 03:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chula Vista (Post 1942991)
The first 4 albums they did with Jimmy Miller are 100% pure gold. Anyone who thinks otherwise doesn't fully understand rock'n'roll.

Church

OccultHawk 04-21-2018 03:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Batlord (Post 1942992)
You probably just don't understand country.

The Rolling Stones made better Americana than Townes Van Zandt.

Quote:

Country was such a small piece of the puzzle. You focusing on it re-enforces the fact that you simply don't understand it.
Chula - just no. That’s so ****ing wrong.

The Batlord 04-21-2018 03:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chula Vista (Post 1942993)
They were the first British band that successfully fused American music with gritty Brit R&R. Country, Gospel, R&B, Pop, and Chicago Blues all done with a British swagger.

Rolling Stones = Greasy Rock.

Country was such a small piece of the puzzle. You focusing on it re-enforces the fact that you simply don't understand it. **** off.

I love a lot of what they did. I just didn't like those four albums you're talking about cause they felt like skin deep experimentations with country. But please tell me more about their press releases that you masturbated to.

OccultHawk 04-21-2018 04:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Batlord (Post 1942998)
I love a lot of what they did. I just didn't like those four albums you're talking about cause they felt like skin deep experimentations with country. But please tell me more about their press releases that you masturbated to.

The funny thing is even though Chula is right about how great those records are your comments express a better understanding of what those records are.

It reminds me of the LZ and the blues conversation.

How the **** can you love something so much and still not ****ing get it?

The Batlord 04-21-2018 04:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OccultHawk (Post 1943001)
The funny thing is even though Chula is right about how great those records are your comments express a better understanding of what those records are.

It reminds me of the LZ and the blues conversation.

How the **** can you love something so much and still not ****ing get it?

Honestly I think the Rolling Stones were just having a bit of fun with country and not trying to truly experiment. They never sounded like they were taking their flirtations with the genre at all seriously. That's all well and good I suppose but it had the effect of boring the snot out of me. I was too high on Townes and Willie to settle for tourists. Maybe I'll change my opinion at some point.

The Batlord 04-21-2018 04:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frownland (Post 1942966)
Oh **** it about to go down.

Nothing but love for the OG but Devo's version is my favourite.

I love that Devo cover to absolute bits and it's a brilliant song that almost no one can touch, unless its the Rolling Stones playing the original. That **** is just massive and raucous and all the catchy.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chula Vista (Post 1942993)
They were the first British band that successfully fused American music with gritty Brit R&R. Country, Gospel, R&B, Pop, and Chicago Blues all done with a British swagger.

As far as their early stuff goes I agree. 50s rock n roll was perfected by those early British R&B bands and the Stones were the height. The Animals and Small Faces made amazing **** that eclipsed Berry, Presley, and Richard, but the Stones absolutely nailed the core of rock n roll to an extent that's been touched by the Sonics and the Stooges but never been potentially bettered without adding extra influences.

OccultHawk 04-21-2018 04:57 PM

Quote:

Honestly I think the Rolling Stones were just having a bit of fun with country and not trying to truly experiment
I wouldn’t describe it as experimental. It’s the way that Americana became such a cornerstone of their essence. From Let It Bleed until like Some Girls country music took a large chunk of the DNA even from songs that didn’t sound country. It’s just in there, like the blues.

The Batlord 04-21-2018 05:00 PM

It still sounds like frat boys having fun with country to me.

uncle salty 04-21-2018 06:26 PM

I like The Stones well enough. I have maybe 30 songs or so.

To me, the thing that sucks about the Stones is, they're awful live.

They've always played loose, but live? They're downright sloppy.

Also live, Mick & Keef sing in harmonies unknown to man.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:26 PM.


© 2003-2024 Advameg, Inc.